Forum Topic

Is deferring CS9 till after the election a bit of an avoidance?

As a cyclist of decades, I've yearned for cycleways since being a kid.Somehow, I've cycled for decades with very few skirmishes. Took the Cycling proficiency test at 12, a more recent urban update course in Camden. Now we have cycleways, I find my self rather strangely, going out of my way to avoid them.They have become racetracks and dominated by cyclists who seem to lose all sense of sensibility when on their machine.  No mudguards so they soak the rider behind, no bell or horn, no hand signals, no acknowledging other traffic, no courtesy shown even to other cyclists on 'inferior' machines. In all, no discipline.Yet these riders, devoid of road safety basics manage to have cameras, but can't afford a bell?We cycle more abroad in flat countries. The mentality is completely different and it is still a pleasure, especially as we get a bit slower with joints and muscles beginning to show the inevitable signs of getting older.So why is this?  Well I have not been impressed by the CS9 plan. So wanted to get involved in getting a better set of options.I found out pretty soon that open debate is not on the cards. Having visited a meeting of the Hounslow Cycling Campaign I was truly disheartened. First few were really nice people. But it became very apparent that they are not welcoming at all to anyone who dares to not agree with them. They have a very closed mindset. And do not seem very open to anything other than their own views and attitudes. Far too anti anything other than cycling.So now we hear it's not going anywhere until after the election.So are the council running away from this? Or the Hounslow Cycling Campaign? Or the electorate?  Or are they hoping to push this through in the usual clandestine way post election?As for the Hounslow Cycling Campaign, Just who are they?  I now know they certainly don't fit the bill to represent me as a local cyclist. I doubt I am alone on this.But a look at their website shows no names, no organisers, no details of who funds them nor if anyone funds them at all. No membership specifics and an assumption that to join them, that you therefore fully support CS9 in all it's glory.They have an opportunity, to stand for election fielding a candidate or two which might indicate the level of support, or to ensure that they are clearly on parties manifestos for the coming election.There is clearly a debate for CS9 and a need for better solutions that suit All cyclists and All other road users, pedestrians as well.So should it not be an election debate with a clear stance?  And names to those who claim to represent ?

Raymond Havelock ● 2768d17 Comments

Not sure you are right Guy. As someone quoted on the sister forum:TfL state "Cycle Superhighways are cycle routes running from outer London into and across central London. They give you safer, faster and more direct journeys into the city and could be your best and quickest way to get to work."

Alex Shpinkov ● 2762d

In other words, policy and impracticality over pragmatism.Or in the modern UK's case, Business as usual.

Raymond Havelock ● 2764d

TfL have been working in plans based upon the A315 got a number of years so while the details of this can be changed as a result of the consultation, the chances of getting a completely different route is basically zero.The A4 isn’t on the list of the next 25 routes TfL will be considering after the current program.You may not like this but it is reality.

Michael Robinson ● 2764d

Brentford is dissected by the A4. it is both sides of it. It is a heavily residential area all the way up to Swyncombe avenue in the North.The A4 was built with cycle ways factored in.Brentford is a ribbon river town and does not really have a centre. Never really has.It was as busy at the Market end as it was at the High St end and dotted with shopping streets and industry all over. With Morrisons going, the one hub that remains have will be no more for a considerable time and will probably never be recovered.There is also very limited space on the highway.Carving up a park just for cyclists is not good for anyone.  Moving bus stops to poor locations is not fair for bus users.South Ealing, Northfields, Boston Manor, Osterley, Spring Grove, Isleworth, Heston and Hounslow are all easily accessible via quiet routes from the A4.All are uphill from the A315. But the A315 offers very few southern alternatives as apart from Isleworth, all routes are to the North.  It links far more places where people live and work and via much quieter routes.The section of the A4 from Gunnersbury to Hammersmith is long neglected, but the space is there.  Chiswick High road is easily accessed again from a host of quiet routes from there. Chiswick High Road and King Street are less then 800m from the A4 at the furthest point and 600m on average. With a host of quiet streets to access precise parts of both roads.Most of the underpasses have been sealed up, which would have been better for cycling than for pedestrians and technology now exists to make them a lot safer than they were.If this were a new Town like Stevenage, then the Cycle routes would be well away from the vehicular highways, and linking into shopping areas etc.It is not possible here without robbing Peter to pay Paul.  The gains are too minimal and the losses too great.This is a commercial city and conurbation. Thats why people are here. It is also old and cramped and best use must be made of space.We are already seeing what damage is being caused by poor policy and development.The foresight of our predecessors brought about the A4.It is not a by-pass. That is a TfL spin.  iIt was built as a relief route and connector toped up residential and industrial developments from Brentford to Hounslow and Staines.  A form of regeneration although then it was purely generation.It is a trunk road. Built because the original Bath Road was too cramped and congested and could not be developed or expanded for the increasing population prompted by the arrival of the District railway.TfL have not got it right on quite a few fronts and their consultations are full of loaded questions and rarely yield to other views to their own.They are wrong to not put this first and make use of an asset.Will people really cycle to the Town Centres?  Why? What for?  Town centres would not be dying if people did that.  Local people already do and they walk and take the bus.  Car Parking is minimal. But commercial traffic is essential.How do you do a large shop on a bike?  Who is going to cycle uphill to a superstore and then ride back laden with shopping? Unless you do a pen pushing occupation with nothing more than an iPad and a sandwich box to carry, and have the luxury of changing and showering facilities then cycling is going to be a recreational thing for the vast majority.The there's the climate. How many have ventured out on a bike either yesterday or today?  I did and turned back after about 400m.  To spend such a vast amount of taxpayers money, much funded from levies from motor transport for such a small gain is wrong when it could be for a much wider and more practicable solution which would open up a whole opportunity for far more.No-one the length of the A4 from Heathrow to Chiswick and Hammersmith has even been consulted about a proper enhanced and safe rehabilitation of the A4 Cycle routes.  The amount of people is the bulk of the boroughs population and the highest proportion of car users under 55.At the very least TfL should be consulting on what All people would like to see.

Raymond Havelock ● 2764d

The A315 at Chiswick High Rd has over 3 times the volume of cyclists of the A4 so cyclists have already voted for their choice of route.I know the A4 is preferred by some and would support improving cycling on it, but it will never have the same number of cyclists as the A315 because it doesn’t go through any town centres.As has been mentioned, superhighway is a silly name and there is every chance it will be changed. It is a protected cycle lane. A parent and their children cycling to the shops is as deserving as protection as someone cycling to work.The original plan for CS9 dating back to 2009 was on the A315 east of Chiswick roundabout and the A4 to the west. Chris Calvi Freeman the previous head of transport at Hounslow succeeded in getting the route changed to the A315 to the west as well, with the objective of linking the town centres of Hounslow, Brentford, Chiswick and Hammersmith, not bypassing them as the A4 does.Since then there has been some small changes, such as using Wellesley Rd in Chiswick to avoid Chiswick roundabout.I can understand some people want the A4 but they are in a minority. The growth of new cyclists will be people cycling to the town centres, not commuters.TfL have been working on the CS9 route based on the A315 for a number of years now so they simply aren’t going to change this. Campaigning for CS9 on the A4 would be a waste of time and effort so Hounslow Cyclng Campaign are focussing on getting the best version of the route proposed.Unfortunately TfL view the A4 as primarily for high volumes of motor traffic and refuse to do anything that may affect this.  Hence when there are changes, such as the recent consultation for the A4 around Boston Manor Rd, there are no real improvements for cycling as it isn’t a priority for TfL on this route. That’s the reality of the situation.

Michael Robinson ● 2765d

No, that's what the detractors claim.

Guy Lambert ● 2767d

Should the mayor of london ban race bike from the CS#?than it will solve a lot of issue I guess... Like I posted previously in City like Amsterdam/Copenhagen they don't use race bike in town. That is the way London should follow and not having cyclist using CS# for training for their next competition So i believe a bit regulation is required at this pointMy 2 cents

Domenico Urzi ● 2767d

Well... Unfortunately that's not what most of the CS9 supporters (on W4 forum and elsewhere) think.

Alex Shpinkov ● 2767d

That though, is the point Guy.If you want to go quickly, then the A4 is the direct route missing out all the pinch points and delays.  The Ethos of the CS is to go quickly. That's what all of the existing ones are like and why they are not for anyone other than tourists and the superset and serious uber cyclists.  For the rest of us, the equivalent of the Ford Fiesta driver, these are routes that intimidate rather than inspire.To be frank. TfL ought to have applied the same degree of enforcement on unstable machines with inadequate road fittings and overfast and lack of obeyance with the same zeal they do for motor vehicles that enter yellow grid boxes or bus lanes. And introduce a competence test.That would probably have been unpopular but brought a much wider benefit and increased confidence in the CS routes.I know you ( Guy ) Cycle a fair bit but suspect you don't use the CS routes.Please go and try them both in morning and late afternoon. It does change one's lifelong dream.The best bit about a bike is it's route diversity. On a bike you can take quieter routes that avoid most delays and hazards and bypass most other road users. I rarely cycle along Chiswick High Road or Brentford High Street even though I go down to Hammersmith quite a lot.  There are a load of easy alternatives and even scenic routes.The time difference is negligible but the routes are so much safer as long as you use your road sense and keep your eyes and eyes open. Just the same as in a car or walkingBut if I'm in a bit of a hurry or the weather is less than pleasant on the bike then I use the A4 as it does save a bit of time. When younger I could pedal up that road faster knowing I was unlikely to encounter anything that would require slower speeds.  CS9 unfortunately is simply wrong for this sort of cycling and carving through an already all too small park in Brentford, and creating Bus Islands and moving things to the detriment of pedestrians and public transport users, unacceptable.Too high a price to pay when a better route exists less than 800m North.The A4 is not a pretty route but it is both sensible and has great potential.As a local rider the back routes are so much better and safer and that is where TfL ought to be investing. Sorting out the one big bugbear - Potholes and poor markings and poor lighting on ideal roads.

Raymond Havelock ● 2767d

"It should take into account the potential number of such “slow” cyclists and the infrastructure upgrade should be fit for purpose."100% agree. Despite propaganda to the contrary and a silly name, this is exactly what CS9 is for!

Guy Lambert ● 2767d

What is happening now is that a lot of cyclists are looking for a cycling bypass. And if it is a bypass – it’s got to go together with the other bypass – along A4.“I doubt you'd suggest that I walk to Chiswick by going up to the A4, crossing Chiswick roundabout, going up the ramp to the A4 then going up (say) Sutton Court Road. If you heard of someone doing this you'd think they had gone mad. Same if they're a cyclist.”I often cycle from Brentford to CHR. I usually cross  Chiswick roundabout and continue along Chiswick High Road. I personally have no problem with the cycling arrangements that are in place for this  now. My other option is to take Wellesley Road which is very nice and safe for cycling.I do appreciate that some may want more safety – and that may require some upgrade of the local cycling infrastructure. But as it is just cycling infrastructure for Chiswick – it should be developed as local cycling infrastructure for “slow” cyclists within Chiswick, and not for those who commute via Chiswick to Hammersmith,Kensington and Central London. It should take into account the potential number of such “slow” cyclists and the infrastructure upgrade should be fit for purpose.

Alex Shpinkov ● 2767d

Like I say, superhighway is a silly name. It's just a proper cycle lane. Very few cyclists use the A4 because it's essentially a by-pass - built to take cars and lorries off suburban streets like Brentford High St, CHR, King Street.Why should cycles which neither congest nor pollute be forced to use bypasses? I doubt you'd suggest that I walk to Chiswick by going up to the A4, crossing Chiswick roundabout, going up the ramp to the A4 then going up (say) Sutton Court Road. If you heard of someone doing this you'd think they had gone mad. Same if they're a cyclist.

Guy Lambert ● 2767d

“They are going from Hounslow or Isleworth or Brentford to Chiswick or Hammersmith or Kensington or the city centre”Guy, A4 rout is best for access to Hammersmith, Kensington and Central London. As for Chiswick – superhighways normally don’t go through a destination, they go to a destination. If there are other destinations on the way – one needs to leave the superhighway and use local network. For those whose destination is Chiswick there are a lot of nice and quiet streets that would safely take you from A4 superhighway to Chiswick. In fact – to all parts of Chiswick, not just to Chiswick High Street.

Alex Shpinkov ● 2767d

The A4 cycleway between here and Hounslow is OK bar the Ealing Road and Syon Lane junctions. Of course it could be improved and TfL are proposing to do that (but in a manner that does not address the real problems IMO - I have written to tell them so, as I believe have Hounslow Cycling)But it is completely irrelevant to the hundreds of cyclists that use Brentford High Street, Kew Bridge Road and Chiswick High Road daily. They are going from Hounslow or Isleworth or Brentford to Chiswick or Hammersmith or Kensington or the city centre.The A4, for all it's cycling infrastructure, is practically bereft of cyclists between Hounslow and Hammersmith because it doesn't link where people want to go. It would be lovely to have the cycle lanes upgraded but it would tempt nobody off Brentford High St, CHR etc: it's a complete red herring.About the one thing I would applaud Boris Johnson for is starting off the CS schemes (including this one!)And yes, it will be (if built) for cyclists of all political parties, ages, colours and creeds

Guy Lambert ● 2768d

I'm sure there are as many Conservatives riding bikes as Labour supporters.The vast majority out on bikes probably don't give a hoot about party politics in any case.But it was a local MP and a Tory one at that who put cycling on the agenda.and, a Tory Mayor who pushed through the CS routes. Both of whom actually cycled daily.So to criticise what are fundamentally Tory conceived proposals is not really political at all. If it's gonna be. Make sure it's gonna be right, especially at the cost and ramifications to all others of all ages.But the CS9 is flawed, deeply flawed and the route is wrong, the A4 is there, runs to the Airport, past bigger areas of commerce and employment and just needs updating and tweaking and swept properly.CS 9 does not bring these benefits to an already existing and spacious route which has been chopped about in places but not decimated beyond recovery.It could be 10 times better an option if some of the facilities used in Holland are adopted. Green tinted street lighting that changes near junction, lining the cycling pedestrian areas, living screens between the road and cycle track to reduce dirt noise and spray. Done in other places but not here. Cheap, simple and effective

Raymond Havelock ● 2768d

Think I posted on here before and possibly long before CS9 was ever conceived that the A4 Cycle way if upgraded and simply kept clean is a superb Cycle route. And that's the one I use most as far as cycleways go.I do use the routes in London and did use the embankment  area a lot but since the CS implementation have found it to be as I described.I now seek alternative quieter routes.  The trouble is the Superhighway is just that.A route to get there faster.  That's not what cycling is. If you want to go fast then go join a club and use a track. Just like Running or Motor racing.If the things were policed and and basic regulations actually enforced, then they might be better but for me, back routes without potholes and decent lighting is far better and safer.

Raymond Havelock ● 2768d

TfL ran a consultation and have received over 5000 responses. They will review those and no doubt revise the scheme.It has been shamelessly politicised by the Chiswick conservative councillors, which means we will have no sensible debate during the pre-election period.The right time to reconsider it will be after the elections when we can take a calm view of it - it won't be built for some time anyway.Going out of your way to avoid cycleways is indeed rather strange. I regularly use the one along the A4, for all its warts, and much prefer it to trying to use the road.Your characterisation of cycleways is most inaccurate. They are used by all sorts of people and CS9 through Brentford and Chiswick, if eventually built, will certainly be like that. Given the amount of crossings of road junctions I suspect the faster cyclists will use it only in selected bits anyway as the road is optimised for faster riders/drivers.Hounslow cycling provide a 'contact us' address and if you wish I can put you in touch with their chair, whom I know quite well. As far as I know they are not funded by anybody, just a collection of local cyclists and in my experience friendly people who are quite happy to discuss different ways of improving the experience for cyclists. Why on earth would they want to stand candidates?They have published a lot of thoughts on the design of CS9, including a detailed rebuttal of the more scaremongering of the conservative councillors' complaints. Oh, and any 'pushing through' will be led by tfL - their funding, their design, their scheme, no elections.I will be standing for the Labour party and will be quite clear that I am in favour of the new cycle lane (misnamed in my opinion) but I have some concerns about it - mainly related to bus stops - insofar as it affects my ward, which I have communicated both verbally and in writing to TfL.If you have 'better solutions' why not let us know what they are, rather than complaining about the solution that has been suggested?

Guy Lambert ● 2768d